I edited it in, that's why it is bracketed, like [sense] also was edited in by the translator to clarify.

So you put your own spin on the sutta

As do you.

.

++++++++++++++++This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

There is freedom from birth, freedom from becoming, freedom from making, freedom from conditioning. If there were not this freedom from birth, freedom from becoming, freedom from making, freedom from conditioning, then escape from that which is birth, becoming, making, conditioning, would not be known here. -- Ud 80

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.People live in one another’s shelter.

I edited it in, that's why it is bracketed, like [sense] also was edited in by the translator to clarify.

So you put your own spin on the sutta

It's just a clarification of a single term, which is clearly bracketed. That's not a spin on the sutta. Also, since it's bracketed, people can leave it aside. So do so if you want to. But to give credit where it is due, it's not mine, it is Ajahn Brahmavamso's clarification which I decided to include, because I think it makes sense in light of the rest of the sutta.

I edited it in, that's why it is bracketed, like [sense] also was edited in by the translator to clarify.

So you put your own spin on the sutta

It's just a clarification of a single term, which is clearly bracketed. That's not a spin on the sutta. Also, since it's bracketed, people can leave it aside. So do so if you want to. But to give credit where it is due, it's not mine, it is Ajahn Brahmavamso's clarification which I decided to include.

Then why say you edited it in :/

It's a clarification with a certain interpretation, or spin on it

My point is we all interpret the suttas and have our own spin on them in various ways. The main thing is if we are all aiming for giving rise to understanding in there here and now and abandoning craving in the here and now, then it's all good

As I said before in the end we have to let go of everything, even all view points

He who binds to himself a joyDoes the wingèd life destroy;But he who kisses the joy as it fliesLives in eternity's sunrise.

If there is total annihilation after death, then both the one who strived, and the one who did not, both have ceased to exist or to enjoy or suffer anything. So the way I see it, we might as well strive, because even if we were to drink in delightful, intense sensual pleasures for our entire lives, party hard and deny ourselves nothing, we would still end up in the same place anyway - absent, non-existent. All of that pleasure, where would it be then? Gone forever. So we might as well frame our lives as though there is literal rebirth, because truthfully most of us don't know for sure, but it would be a hell of a mistake to assume there is not, and then be proved wrong as one is actually dying, finally wishing one had restrained oneself more, and meditated more during one's life. "Alas, if only I had framed my life as though there was literal rebirth, I might have partied less, and renounced more."

manas wrote:If there is total annihilation after death, then both the one who strived, and the one who did not, both have ceased to exist or to enjoy or suffer anything. So the way I see it, we might as well strive, because even if we were to drink in delightful, intense sensual pleasures for our entire lives, party hard and deny ourselves nothing, we would still end up in the same place anyway - absent, non-existent. All of that pleasure, where would it be then? Gone forever. So we might as well frame our lives as though there is literal rebirth, because truthfully most of us don't know for sure, but it would be a hell of a mistake to assume there is not, and then be proved wrong as one is actually dying, finally wishing one had restrained oneself more, and meditated more during one's life. "Alas, if only I had framed my life as though there was literal rebirth, I might have partied less, and renounced more."

metta

That's assuming that if we don't read the suttas in terms of literal rebirth then you hold a view of oblivion after death, which just isn't true

Thats just jumping around with views

For me I don't think about metaphysics in that way i just try to focus attention on the here and now

He who binds to himself a joyDoes the wingèd life destroy;But he who kisses the joy as it fliesLives in eternity's sunrise.

clw_uk wrote:Now your trying to imply I'm an annihilationist, or people who post the same as me are. Why do you assume we are? I have never said I am one, or ever posted anything that is pro-annihilationist

You are. You're not an ariyan and therefore you affirm a self to which is to be annihalated at death. As much as you have constructed this elaborate conceptual framework that denies a self, you're still doing it from the position of a self, you just don't seem to realize it. That is the sad truth of the matter for all of us who remain putthujanas. Unless of course you would like to claim stream entry?

Self view is a lot more complex than people realize.

It cannot be neutralised simply by denial of it, for one cannot escape self view by reflexion.

I say this knowing full well that I too have avijja and wrong view on the grand scale, but at least I have the mundane right view that kamma and rebirth are what guides these 5 khandhas after the breakup of the body.

I still think kamma and rebirth denial is a wholesale butchering of the Buddha's teachings, and can only be undertaken by those who have a conceit to contend that their views and intellect are on par with the Buddha's. They have never submitted to the fact that we as putthujanas are deluded and that avijja is what guides our thinking.

But alas I honestly don't think anything positive could come from a continuation of this discussion between you and I. You've done nothing but answer my post sarcastically, rolling your eyes etc and I would argue with at least some measure of annoyance.

So please let's just agree to disagree Craig, and know that I think you're a top bloke when this business of rebirth is laid aside, and I didn't mean to offend you one bit. You asked for my view and you got it, and yes there were places where I perhaps went a bit overboard - I made it quite clear that I shouldn't have said that people who do not affirm kamma and rebirth are not real buddhists, I even had all the opportunity to remove that passage from my post, but I decided that I should suffer the consequences of having said it in the first place, so I deserve any flak I should cop from that comment, it wasn't fair.

I know perhaps even in this post there will be things I have said that might offend you, and if that's the case then I'm sorry for the offense I might cause. I just feel strongly that the Buddha's teachings are under fire from those who choose to reinterpret something he has been quite categorical about. I mean there are entire suttas dedicated to heaven and hell where the Buddha specifically states:

"Bhikkhus I tell you this not as something I heard from another recluse or brahmin. I tell you this as something that I have actually known, seen, and discovered myself." - MN 129

The above leaves me beyond a shadow of a doubt, that rebirth is literal, and that the Buddha taught it.

So let's leave it there Craig. Know that I like you as a person and I want you to be happy and successful in your endeavours, I'm sorry if I ever came across otherwise

mettaJack

"For a disciple who has conviction in the Teacher's message & lives to penetrate it, what accords with the Dhamma is this:'The Blessed One is the Teacher, I am a disciple. He is the one who knows, not I." - MN. 70 Kitagiri Sutta

reflection wrote:"And what is birth? Whatever birth, taking birth, descent (into the mother's womb), coming-to-be, coming-forth, appearance of aggregates, & acquisition of [sense] media of the various beings in this or that group of beings, that is called birth.http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html

reflection,Do you have some information which helped you reach your view that the word descent meant into the mother's womb?

Also, I'm interested in what sense you can make of the list more generally. Do you see it as just being a random list of different views on what birth means?...do you see it as a progression of some sort...etc.....?chownah

++++++++++++++++This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

There is freedom from birth, freedom from becoming, freedom from making, freedom from conditioning. If there were not this freedom from birth, freedom from becoming, freedom from making, freedom from conditioning, then escape from that which is birth, becoming, making, conditioning, would not be known here. -- Ud 80

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.People live in one another’s shelter.

Out of interest - If the Buddha was here today, is there anyone here that would not bow at his feet thrice, submit and be admonished by him as to their practice and way of life?

"For a disciple who has conviction in the Teacher's message & lives to penetrate it, what accords with the Dhamma is this:'The Blessed One is the Teacher, I am a disciple. He is the one who knows, not I." - MN. 70 Kitagiri Sutta

BlackBird wrote:Out of interest - If the Buddha was here today, is there anyone here that would not bow at his feet thrice, submit and be admonished by him as to their practice and way of life?

Hi Jack,

Sadly the Buddha isn't here today, he died a very long time ago and lived on the other side of the world in another culture where people communicated in a completely different language to mine.

Yes, but happily - This question was posed a hypothetical, meaning you can put aside this fact as it's not really relevant.

Aloka wrote: Is learning from a Dhamma teacher always about submission and being admonished ? I have not experienced this with the living teachers I have spoken to from two different traditions.

Being able to be admonished easily is an important trait according to the Buddha.

Aloka wrote:Can I ask if you have/have had a living teacher/teachers to discuss your own practice with ?

With metta,

Aloka

I have had more than one.

Are you prepared to answer my question as to which camp you would be included in? I know it's a bit of a tangent, but I do have something to lead on with, so I ask that everyone humour me for now and I will elaborate in due time.

with mettaJack

"For a disciple who has conviction in the Teacher's message & lives to penetrate it, what accords with the Dhamma is this:'The Blessed One is the Teacher, I am a disciple. He is the one who knows, not I." - MN. 70 Kitagiri Sutta

Are you prepared to answer my question as to which camp you would be included in? I know it's a bit of a tangent, but I do have something to lead on with, so I ask that everyone humour me for now and I will elaborate in due time.

Well of course I would prostrate to the Buddha and listen to what he had to say to me ! However I don't know what you mean about "which camp" and if this is some kind of game, I'm not playing, sorry. Its a lovely morning and I want to go outside to meditate.

Have a good day, Jack.

Last edited by Aloka on Sat Jul 06, 2013 8:28 am, edited 2 times in total.

Are you prepared to answer my question as to which camp you would be included in? I know it's a bit of a tangent, but I do have something to lead on with, so I ask that everyone humour me for now and I will elaborate in due time.

Well of course I would prostrate to the Buddha and listen to what he had to say to me ! However I don't know what you mean about "which camp" and if this is some kind of game, I'm not playing, sorry. Its a lovely morning and I want to go outside to meditate.

Have a good day, Jack.

Sadhu then, I will wait and see if anyone answers in the negative before I go on. I didn't have an assumption that you would answer in the negative, but when I made that first post the question was 'Is there anybody here who would not...' when you responded to the post but without answering that question it I was interested to seek a clarification, nothing more.

To answer one of your questions from before. No, learning from a teacher is not always nor often about submission and being admonished. I don't recall implying any such thing but I am sorry if that's what came across.

And I assure you there are no games being played Aloka, It's a shame that you would consider that a distinct possibility, so much so that you would phrase that the way you did. I'm a tad concerned that you're reading some kind of intent into my posts that is simply not present. Glad to hear it's a nice day out, enjoy your meditation, I hope it goes well

mettaJack

"For a disciple who has conviction in the Teacher's message & lives to penetrate it, what accords with the Dhamma is this:'The Blessed One is the Teacher, I am a disciple. He is the one who knows, not I." - MN. 70 Kitagiri Sutta

He seeing a form with the eye becomes greedy for a pleasant form, or averse to a disagreeable form. Abides with mindfulness of the body not established and with a limited mind. Not knowing the release of mind nor the release through wisdom as it really is, where thoughts of demerit cease completely (*11). He falls to the path of agreeing and disagreeing and feels whatever feeling, pleasant, unpleasant, or neither unpleasant nor pleasant. Delighted and pleased with those feelings he appropriates them. To him delighted, pleased and appropriating those feelings arises interest. That interest for feelings is the holding (* 12) To him holding, there is being, from being arises birth, from birth decay and death, grief, lament, unpleasantness, displeasure and distress, thus arises the complete mass of unpleasantness. Hearing a sound with the ear, cognising a smell with the nose, cognising a taste with the tongue, cognising a touch with the body, cognising an idea with the mind, becomes greedy for a pleasant idea. Becomes averse to a disagreeable idea. Abides with mindfulness of the body not established and with a limited mind. Not knowing the release of mind nor the release through wisdom as it really is. Not knowing how thoughts of demerit cease completely. He falls to the path of agreeing and disagreeing and feels whatever feeling, pleasant, unpleasant, or neither unpleasant nor pleasant. Delighted and pleased with those feelings, appropriates them. To him delighted, pleased and appropriating those feelings arise interest. That interest for feelings is the holding (*12) To him holding, there is being, from being arises birth, from birth decay and death, grief, lament, unpleasantness, displeasure and distress, thus arises the complete mass of unpleasntness.

Dependent Origination is clearly stated as occurring in moment, every time there is holding to feelings

There is something dreadfully wrong with the translation above, especially in the red bits. What was translated as -

Delighted and pleased with those feelings, appropriates them. To him delighted, pleased and appropriating those feelings arise interest. That interest for feelings is the holding (*12) To him holding, there is being, from being arises birth, from birth decay and death, grief, lament, unpleasantness, displeasure and distress, thus arises the complete mass of unpleasntness.

The translation completely missed out and omitted translating the paccayā bits, leading one to interpret this passage as if it imports temporal simultaneity and immediacy of action. This is incorrect, as an earlier section of the sutta explains paccayā as follows -

And to whom, worthless man, do you understand me to have taught the Dhamma like that? Haven't I, in many ways, said of dependently co-arisen consciousness, 'Apart from a requisite condition, there is no coming-into-play of consciousness'?

It is not apparent from this sutta, but in many other suttas, DO is explained in a very standard formula ie idappaccayatā. The special grammatical formulation for cause and effect in that formula imports no simultaneity. As the grammars explain it, cause and effect according to idappaccayatā can be separated by huge spans of time.

Alls I know is that my conception of Paticcasamupada and Clw_uk's conception are oceans apart But thank you for your post Sylvester, it was well worth the effort, made for an interesting read.

mettaJack

Last edited by BlackBird on Sat Jul 06, 2013 9:32 am, edited 1 time in total.

"For a disciple who has conviction in the Teacher's message & lives to penetrate it, what accords with the Dhamma is this:'The Blessed One is the Teacher, I am a disciple. He is the one who knows, not I." - MN. 70 Kitagiri Sutta

"Now what is aging and death? Whatever aging, decrepitude, brokenness, graying, wrinkling, decline of life-force, weakening of the faculties of the various beings in this or that group of beings, that is called aging. Whatever deceasing, passing away, breaking up, disappearance, dying, death, completion of time, break up of the aggregates, casting off of the body, interruption in the life faculty of the various beings in this or that group of beings, that is called death.

"And what is birth? Whatever birth, taking birth, descent (into the mother's womb), coming-to-be, coming-forth, appearance of aggregates, & acquisition of [sense] media of the various beings in this or that group of beings, that is called birth.http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html

Yes, in the suttas birth and death are clearly and repeatedly described as physical processes. The traditional interpretation of DO isn't perfect but it is at least consistent with the way the nidanas are defined in MN9, SN12.2 etc. Trying to impose a "psychological" interpretation on DO seems illogical and entirely inconsistent with the suttas.

Sylvester wrote:It is not apparent from this sutta, but in many other suttas, DO is explained in a very standard formula ie idappaccayatā. The special grammatical formulation for cause and effect in that formula imports no simultaneity. As the grammars explain it, cause and effect according to idappaccayatā can be separated by huge spans of time.

Interesting comment. The way I understand DO is to see the nidanas as conditionally arising processes rather than events, which I think is in line with the sutta descriptions.

"I ride tandem with the random, Things don't run the way I planned them, In the humdrum."Peter Gabriel lyric